ASTM F1524-1995(2013) Standard Guide for Use of Advanced Oxidation Process for the Mitigation of Chemical Spills《减轻化学溢出物用先进氧化工艺使用的标准指南》.pdf

《ASTM F1524-1995(2013) Standard Guide for Use of Advanced Oxidation Process for the Mitigation of Chemical Spills《减轻化学溢出物用先进氧化工艺使用的标准指南》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ASTM F1524-1995(2013) Standard Guide for Use of Advanced Oxidation Process for the Mitigation of Chemical Spills《减轻化学溢出物用先进氧化工艺使用的标准指南》.pdf（4页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、Designation: F1524 95 (Reapproved 2013)Standard Guide forUse of Advanced Oxidation Process for the Mitigation ofChemical Spills1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F1524; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revisi

2、on, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This guide covers the considerations for advancedoxidation processes (AOPs) in the mitigation of spill

3、ed chemi-cals and hydrocarbons dissolved into ground and surfacewaters.1.2 This guide addresses the application of advanced oxi-dation alone or in conjunction with other technologies.1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded asstandard. No other units of measurement are included in thisst

4、andard.1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use. In addi

5、tion, it is theresponsibility of the user to ensure that such activity takesplace under the control and direction of a qualified person withfull knowledge of any potential safety and health protocols.2. Terminology2.1 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:2.1.1 advanced oxidation processes

6、(AOPs)ambient tem-perature processes that involve the generation of highly reac-tive radical species and lead to the oxidation of waterbornecontaminants (usually organic) in surface and ground waters.2.1.2 inorganic foulantscompounds, such as iron, calciumand manganese, that precipitate throughout a

7、 treatment unitand cause reduced efficiency by fouling the quartz sleeve thatprotects the lamp in photolytic oxidation AOP systems or thefibreglass mesh that is coated with TiO2in photocatalytic AOPsystems.2.1.3 mineralizationthe complete oxidation of an organiccompound to carbon dioxide, water, and

8、 acid compounds, thatis, hydrochloric acid if the compound is chlorinated.2.1.4 photoreactorthe core of the photoreactor is a UVlamp that emits light in the broad range of 200 to 400 nmwavelength range.2.1.5 radical speciesa powerful oxidizing agent, princi-pally the hydroxyl radical, that reacts ra

9、pidly with virtually allorganic compounds to oxidize and eventually lead to theircomplete mineralization.2.1.6 scavengersa term used for substances that react withhydroxyl radicals that do not yield species that propagate thechain reaction for contaminant destruction. Scavengers can beeither organic

10、 or inorganic compounds.3. Significance and Use3.1 GeneralThis guide contains information regarding theuse of AOPs to oxidize and eventually mineralize hazardousmaterials that have entered surface and groundwater as theresult of a spill. Since much of this technology development isstill at the bench

11、scale level, these guidelines will only refer tothose units that are currently applied at a field scale level.3.2 Oxidizing Agents:3.2.1 Hydroxyl Radical (OH)The OH radical is the mostcommon oxidizing agent employed by this technology due toits powerful oxidizing ability. When compared to other oxi-

12、dants such as molecular ozone, hydrogen peroxide, orhypochlorite, its rate of attack is commonly much faster. Infact, it is typically one million (106) to one billion (109) timesfaster than the corresponding attack with molecular ozone (1).2The three most common methods for generating the hydroxylra

13、dical are described in the following equations:H2O21hv2OH (1)2O31H2O22OH13O2(2)Fe121H2O2OHFe131OH2Fentons Reaction! (3)3.2.1.1 Hydrogen peroxide is the preferred oxidant forphotolytic oxidation systems since ozone will encourage the airstripping of solutions containing volatile organics (2). Capital

14、and operating costs are also taken into account when a decisionon the choice of oxidant is made.1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F20 on HazardousSubstances and Oil Spill Response and is the direct responsibility of SubcommitteeF20.22 on Mitigation Actions.Current edition appro

15、ved April 1, 2013. Published April 2013. Originallyapproved in 1994. Last previous edition approved in 2007 as F1524 95 (2007).DOI: 10.1520/F1524-95R13.2The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end ofthis standard.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive,

16、 PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States13.2.1.2 Advanced oxidation technology has also been devel-oped based on the anatase form of titanium dioxide. Thismethod by which the photocatalytic process generates hy-droxyl radicals is described in the following equations:TiO21hv1H2OO

17、H1H11e2(4)2e212O212H2O2OH1O212OH2(5)3.2.2 PhotolysisDestruction pathways, besides the hy-droxyl radical attack, are very important for the more refrac-tory compounds such as chloroform, carbon tetrachloride,trichloroethane, and other chlorinated methane or ethane com-pounds. A photoreactors ability

18、to destroy these compoundsphotochemically will depend on its output level at specificwavelengths. Since most of these lamps are proprietary,preliminary benchscale testing becomes crucial when dealingwith these compounds.3.3 AOP Treatment Techniques:3.3.1 Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) may be ap

19、pliedalone or in conjunction with other treatment techniques asfollows:3.3.1.1 Following a pretreatment step. The pretreatmentprocess can be either a physical or chemical process for theremoval of inorganic or organic scavengers from the contami-nated stream prior to AOP destruction.3.3.1.2 Followin

20、g a preconcentration step. Due to the in-crease in likelihood of radical or molecule contact, very dilutesolutions can be treated cost effectively usingAOPs after beingconcentrated.3.4 AOP Treatment ApplicationsAdvanced oxidation pro-cesses (AOPs) are most cost effective for those waste streamsconta

21、ining organic compounds at concentrations below 1 %(10 000 ppm). This figure will vary depending upon the natureof the compounds and whether there is competition for theoxidizing agent.4. Constraints on Usage4.1 GeneralAlthough AOPs are destruction processes, inorder for compound mineralization to t

22、ake place, the oxidationreactions must be taken to completion. In most cases, effluentanalysis is the only method available to ensure this state. Somecompounds are selective in their reactivity. For these reasons,preliminary bench-scale testing and literature searches on thepredicted reaction mechan

23、isms are essential prior to full scaletreatment.4.2 Presence of ScavengersScavengers, such as bicarbon-ate and carbonate, will adversely affect the ability of theoxidizing agent to react with the target compounds if thesecompounds are left as ions within the solution. Adjusting thepH of the solution

24、 will reduce this problem, however, theadditional cost requirements must be balanced against thebenefit received.4.3 Contaminant IdentificationThe types of contaminantsand their corresponding destruction rate constants will affectthe overall system performance. In general, chlorinated aliphat-ics wi

25、th carbon-to-carbon double bonds (unsaturated), degrademore quickly than chlorinated compounds with single bonds(saturated). In addition, refractory compounds such as carbontetrachloride, chloroform, and other chlorinated methane com-pounds are quite resistant to degradation in the presence of thehy

26、droxyl radical and should be destroyed photochemically(that is, UV alone).4.4 pH AdjustmentAdjusting the pH of the solution priorto treatment may significantly affect the performance of thetreatment. A feed solution at a pH of 9 will tend to causeprecipitation of most inorganics, while a pH of 5 wil

27、l causethem to remain in solution throughout the treatment process. Insituations where the inorganics are in a relatively low concen-tration (low parts per million), one would tend to lower the pH,while a higher pH would be preferable at the higher concen-trations where the inorganics could be separ

28、ated and removed.4.5 System FoulingGenerally, inorganic foulants, such asiron, manganese, and calcium, in the ppm range, cause reducedflow, increased pressure and low performance of a treatmentsystem. This phenomenon is common in most organic treat-ment units regardless of the mechanism employed. Pr

29、etreat-ment systems usually involve chemical addition (that is, pHadjustment) or membrane technology, or both, as they aregenerally the most economical and effective for inorganicremoval. Preliminary benchscale testing is commonly used todetermine the applicability and the cost-effectiveness of thed

30、ifferent pretreatment systems.4.6 Off-Gas AnalysisOrganic analysis of the exiting gas-eous stream will assist the operator in modifying systemparameters to maximize system performance and efficiency.This technique is also beneficial during preliminary testing asit provides an indication of the AOP t

31、echnologys ability todestroy the compounds as compared to simply stripping themfrom the water phase into the air.4.7 Destruction Rate ConstantsThe reaction of the OHradical with organic compounds is largely dependent upon therate constant. A list (3) of reaction rates for common contami-nants is sho

32、wn in Table 1.5. Practical Applications5.1 Emergency SituationsAdvanced oxidation process(AOP) applications would normally follow containment andrecovery of the waste stream in question. The time required forthis primary stage should be sufficient for the AOP user to atleast obtain the necessary bac

33、kground information on theTABLE 1 Rate Constants for the Hydroxyl RadicalCompound, m kM, OH, (10+9m1s1)Benzene 7.8Hydroperoxide Ion 7.5Vinyl Chloride 7.1Chlorobenzene 4.51-Butanol 4.2Trichloroethane 4.0Nitrobenzene 3.9Pyridine 3.8Toluene 3.0Tetrachloroethane 2.3Carbonate Ion 0.39Dichloromethane 0.05

34、8Bicarbonate 0.0085Chloroform ;0.005Carbon Tetrachloride NRF1524 95 (2013)2contaminants in question. Benchscale confirmation testing isdesirable, if time permits. Under no circumstances shouldAOPbe used in a clean-up unless the manufacturer can supply dataconcerning testing on the same or similar ch

35、emical solutions.5.1.1 Emergency Clean-Up OperationFor a spill, underemergency clean-up situations, the AOP technology user mustdo the following:5.1.1.1 Monitor the feed, effluent, and off-gas stream analy-sis closely,5.1.1.2 Monitor the feed flowrate and adjust accordingly,5.1.1.3 Use holding tanks

36、 prior to discharge in order tobuffer changes in discharge concentrations, and5.1.1.4 Modify system parameters as necessary, based onthe above conditions.5.2 Non-Emergency OperationOnce the leachate orchemicals reach the groundwater, the critical period is over andrapid response is less effective. P

37、reliminary testing and prepa-ration can be performed by the mitigator prior to treatment.Pretesting and manufacturers information will determine themost appropriate operating conditions and the pretreatmentrequired. This will not, however, reduce the importance ofclosely monitoring all aspects of th

38、e data. Sudden changes infeed concentrations could severely reduce the destruction rates.5.3 Field Scale Results Using AOP TechnologyTable 2provides a summary of typical destruction capabilitiesachieved during photolytic AOP field trials conducted between19881993.6. Keywords6.1 advanced oxidation; A

39、OP; destruction; enhanced oxida-tion; hydrogen peroxide; hydroxyl radical; ozone; photolysis;titanium dioxide; ultravioletTABLE 2 Typical Field Scale Results of AOP Field TrialsNOTE 1MF microfiltrationRO reverse osmosisSpecific Compound FlowrateConcentrationNotes ReferenceInitial Final1,4 dioxane 19

40、114 L/min 100 ppm 10 ppb system able to reduce dioxane in raw or deionized waterconsistently(1)methylene chloride 19 L/min 130730 ppb 3.1 ppb high iron conc, prevented (1)trichloroethylene 9.719.9 ppm 0.4 ppb precipitation by maintaining pH at 31,2 trans-dichloroethylene 612.5 ppm 0.1 ppbvinyl chlor

41、ide 101010 ppb 0.5 ppbchloroethane 10 ppb 0.3 ppbnitrate esters, explosives 15 L/min 10005000 ppm 1 ppm systems tested with UV/H202, UV alone, and proprietarypretreatment for carbonate removal(1)trichloroethylene, 30 L/min 1.55 ppm 5 ppb pH adjustment, (4)benzene, 0.23 ppm 0.8 ppb MF/UV/H202 systemc

42、hloroform, 0.08 ppm 0.04 ppmchlorobenzene, 0.05 ppm 1 ppb1,2 dichloroethane 0.01 ppm 2 ppbbenzene, 23 L/min 1.22 ppm 0.05 ppm UV/H202(5)toluene, 0.47 ppm 0.05 ppmxylene 9.29 ppm 0.10 ppmethylbenzene 0.59 ppm 0.05 ppmn-nitrosodimethylamine 95 L/min 80 ppt 5 ppt UV (6)cyanide not available 6 ppm 2 ppm

43、 sulphide and fluoride (7)precipitated prior to treatmentdichloroethylene, batch, 5 minutes 0.5 ppm ND phenolics pretreated with proprietary reagent (7)dichloroethane 5 ppm NDbenzene 3 ppm 0.009 ppmtrichloroethylene, 26 L/min 30 000 ppb 0.4 ppb adjusted pH 3 to prevent fouling of UV quartz (7)dichlo

44、roethylene, 20 000 ppb 0.1 ppbvinyl chloride 500 ppb 0.5 ppbmethylene chloride batch 470 ppb 1 ppb UV/03/H202 at pH 10 (8)benzene 353 ppb 1 ppbtoluene 2740 ppb 4 ppbF1524 95 (2013)3REFERENCES(1) Keller, L., Reed, D., “Recent Applications of Environment CanadasMobile Enhanced Oxidation Unit,” Air and

45、 Waste ManagementAssociation 85th Annual Meeting and Exhibition, 1991.(2) Nyer, E. K., Groundwater Treatment Technology, 2nd Ed., VanNostrand Reinhold, New York, 1992, p. 119.(3) Glaze, W. H., Kang, J., “Chemical Models of Advanced OxidationProcesses,” ProceedingsA Symposium on Advanced Oxidation Pr

46、o-cesses for the Treatment of Contaminated Water and Air, 1990.(4) Jacquemot, S., Keller, L., Punt, M., “Comparison of MobileTreatmentTechnologies at the Gloucester Landfill,” Internal Report, Emergen-cies Engineering Division, Environment Canada, 1991.(5) Ladanowski, C., “Field Scale Demonstration

47、of Technologies forTreating Groundwater at the Gulf Strachan Gas Plant,” CanadianAssociation of Petroleum Producers Publication, April 1993.(6) Cooper, D., and Keller, L., “Advanced Oxidation Technology Dem-onstration at Ohsweken Six Nations Indian Reserve, Proceedings ofthe Tenth Technical Seminar

48、on Chemical Spills,” 1993.(7) Correspondence from Doug Reed, Solarchem EnvironmentalSystems, Nov. 6, 1991.(8) Solarchem Enterprises,“ Leachate Remediation at the Oswego Super-fund Site Using RayoxA Second Generation Enhanced OxidationProcess,” Final Report to Emergencies Engineering Division, Envi-r

49、onment Canada, 1989.ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentionedin this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the riskof infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years andif not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Yo